Search

Are teams structured in order to mirror the (technical) tasks they carry out and is this related to innovation? Few empirical studies exist on this relationship despite the popular notion of the mirroring hypothesis in organizational design literature. Building on the insight that product modularity (as a technical task) can have contradictory effects on innovation, we conceptualize modularity as two-dimensional, module standardization and reconfiguration, and we empirically explore the mirroring hypothesis between these technical elements and the team structure (e.g., team interaction) separately. Additionally, we offer nuance in terms of the effects of the alignment between product modularity and team interaction on innovation. A survey was used to develop a dataset of 140 R&D teams of a large international organization in the automotive industry. The results suggest a negative relationship between the alignment of team interaction and module standardization on innovation. Furthermore, the degree of alignment of team interaction and module reconfiguration reveals a positive relationship with innovation. Multiple data triangulations and robustness checks were conducted and reveal comparable results. The findings contribute to the literature of organizational design within the context of R&D teams. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Large organizations build internal, R&D teams for collaboration and the sharing, creation, and distribution of knowledge, teams which are difficult to structure and integrate. To reduce complexity and to foster innovation, organizations can introduce product modularity as one essential strategy for R&D teams to develop their products in collaboration. Collaboration in R&D teams working with product modularity is, however, paradoxical, as it requires autonomy, on one hand, working and keeping modules separate in design, and yet interdependent on the other hand, as teams need to be participative in the integrative process of bringing different modules together. Research into intra-organizational collaboration is scant, and the lack thereof calls for more empirical evidence of the effects of collaboration on innovation. Drawing upon the knowledge-based view of the firm, we examine collaboration in R&D teams by analyzing the effects of the central elements of collaboration (team interaction, knowledge diversity) on innovation, under the moderating effect of product modularity. Analyzing survey data from 101 teams and 550 engineers in a global automotive firm, we find a negative impact of team interaction on innovation, whereas knowledge diversity shows a positive impact on innovation. Furthermore, product modularity moderates negatively both relationships, those being team interaction and innovation, along with knowledge diversity and innovation. These findings contribute to the literature and management practice of product modularity within the context of R&D teams. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We apply a collaboration portfolio perspective to the context of small ventures and theorize a nonlinear effect of collaborative portfolio diversity on two distinct performance outcomes: venture innovative performance and venture opportunity recognition. As not all ventures benefit equally from their collaborative activities, however, we continue by exploring the moderating effect of entrepreneurial self-efficacy on these two relationships, posing that entrepreneurs with greater self-efficacy have both higher optimal levels of collaborative portfolio diversity as well as a less negative curvilinear effect. Results from a large-scale survey among ventures in the Dutch creative industries show that entrepreneurs with low levels of self-efficacy exhibit a strong inverted U-shaped effect of collaborative portfolio diversity on opportunity recognition, while a strictly positive effect is found for entrepreneurs with higher self-efficacy, in line with our theorized effects. Our findings imply that too much diversity can be harmful for those entrepreneurs with less faith in their entrepreneurial capabilities, whereas those with higher levels of entrepreneurial self-efficacy are able to reap the full benefits of diversity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our general orientation and in-depth analyses of recent studies in a top management journal reveals that more than half (i.e., 63 percent) use multiple secondary databases, but only a small percentage (i.e., < 10 percent) reports how the connections between these databases were made. Based on this review, we report on four consecutive methods of matching firm-level data across different secondary databases. We used these four matching methods to obtain data from multiple firm-level data sources. Comparing the results reveals large differences in the number of observations obtained per matching method. Additionally, we empirically investigate the effects of different inter-organizational relationships (e.g., alliances, joint ventures, mergers and acquisitions) on firms' innovative performance, based on these four matching methods. Since these results also differ based on which matching method was used, we argue that reporting the matching method used in a study is of vital importance. This will improve the accumulation of knowledge on how data across secondary databases can be combined and improves the clarity of the conducted studies. Moreover, and based on our results we provide a guideline for a complete matching method. As such this paper should support researchers, reviewers, and editors in making better-informed decisions about how different secondary firm-level databases can and should be combined. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we combine the findings of two distinct insights in the recombination literature. The first claims that firms have a tendency towards searching local. Literature in this stream has argued that spanning organizational boundaries is a way to break that tendency. The second claims that the structural characteristics of the knowledgebase affect the firm's likelihood of searching locally. Literature in this stream has argued that a non-decomposable (integrated) knowledge base forces firms to search local and that a decomposable (modular) knowledge base allows firms to search broadly. Aligning these insights, we investigate the extent to which knowledgebase decomposability allows or hampers firms to span organizational boundaries. We use a sample of 144 biotech-firms engaged in 4428 organizational boundary spanning activities. Empirical findings suggest that firms with a near-decomposable knowledge base engage more in organizational boundary spanning activities. Furthermore, our empirical findings suggest that the structure of the knowledgebase also impacts the organizational boundary spanning governance choices. Our research therefore indicates that the structure of the knowledge base is an antecedent of the boundary spanning choices firms make. The results imply a further inquiry of the relationship between the knowledge base structure, organizational boundary spanning, and innovative performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Our review of all SMJ studies of the last six years reveals that 63 percent use multiple secondary databases, but only 11 percent report how the connections between these databases were made. This limits our knowledge of how information across secondary databases can be combined and restricts the possibilities for replicating these studies. In this paper, we report on four different methods of matching firm-specific data across secondary databases. Through a replication study, we show that empirical results differ based on the matching method used. Additionally, we contribute to the body of knowledge about the effects of different inter-organizational relationships on firms' innovative performance. This paper should support researchers, reviewers, and editors in making better-informed decisions about how different secondary databases can be matched. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigates the influence of technological uncertainty (i.e., technological turbulence) on changes in a focal firm's Interorganizational Relations (IOR) portfolio. More specifically, the focus is on what firms' responses are in terms of the diversity of modes used in their IOR portfolio (e.g., alliances, joint ventures and M&As). Firms can use the diversity of their IOR portfolio to deal with technological turbulence. At the most general level, firms might choose between two opposing responses: to increase or decrease portfolio diversity. These two responses relate to a broader organizational debate about firms' responses to uncertainty: Do firms adapt (fight) or revert to their core business (flight)? The influence of two distinct types of technological turbulence (i.e., industry and firm-specific) on the diversity of modes used in an IOR portfolio is investigated. Arguments from both real options theory and threat-rigidity theory are used in this examination. Both the theory and the results show that the two distinct types of technological turbulence trigger two opposing responses from firms. Additionally, the results show that real options theory appears to be more valid with regard to industry technological turbulence, while threat-rigidity theory appears to be more valid for firm-specific technological turbulence. In addition to answering the question as to what firms' responses are to the two types of technological turbulence, this study investigates how firms enact these responses. This involves delving more deeply into the portfolio level and investigating how firms respond to the two types of technological turbulence with regard to initiating different modes of IOR in their IOR portfolio (resulting in changes in diversity). This was investigated by developing a panel dataset of the 282 largest U.S. pharmaceutical biotechnology firms from 1990-2007. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper focusses on two streams of research that delivered mixed results on the role of two key phenomena: alliance portfolio diversity (APD) - diversity in the total set of the direct alliance partners types a focal firm maintains - and resource constraints. We argue that there is an inverted U-shape relationship between APD and innovative performance. Based on the literature on resource constraints, we hypothesize and find a positive influence of resource constraints on innovative performance and on the relationship between APD and innovative performance. Contributing to the field of resource constraints and specifically to the idea that resource constraints can have different effects under different circumstances, we furthermore argue and find that that the positive moderating effect differs for the relationships between APD and two dimensions of innovative performance, incremental and radical. We test our hypotheses on a panel dataset of 10,334 firms, from five consecutive Community Innovation Surveys. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this paper we explore the relative performance effects of diversity in a firm's R&D alliance portfolio by considering different partner types (customers, suppliers, competitors, universities, research institutes, commercial laboratories, and own-group firms). Using a panel dataset of innovation-active firms in the Netherlands from 1995 to 2006, we found that the partner diversity of a firm's R&D alliance portfolio shows an inverted U-shaped relationship with radical innovation and financial performance. A positive relationship is found between diversity in the alliance portfolio and incremental innovative performance. The results also suggest that a lower level of diversity is needed to achieve optimal financial performance compared to radical innovative performance, whereas for incremental innovation a higher level of portfolio diversity appears to give the best performance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]